posted 08-10-2001 11:50 AM
Most folks here know that I want hard data. In particular, I think the single most important piece of data we can get is a reliable and valid measurement of the components of suspect contrails.

Physical in-situ collection of contrail material is probably out of the question. The cost is simply too great, and anyone who did actually come up with the money and methodology to do a collection could well run afoul of the FAA and their flight limitations.

Collecting stuff that falls on the ground or viewing thingies in the air via flashlight won't work, either; there's no evidence that they are actual contrail components, or, if they are, they hadn't been compromised by other atmospheric contaminants.

I'd always thought that some sort of remote sensing, i.e., spectroscopy, could give a reliable indication of the makeup of contrail particles. However, 3T3L1 mentioned that another colleague, Mr. toxdoc says that spectroscopy wouldn't work unless the object being studied were incandescent.

I know very little about spectroscopy, except that there seem to be two types, emission and absorption. Yet scientists have figured out the composition of Jupiter's clouds (I assume through spectroscopy) and their temperature is in the same range as that of the Earth's surface and its clouds.

But the bottom line is I simply don't know enough about spectroscopy to even know if it's a feasible approach.

My question is this: Is there anyone around with actual hands-on knowledge of spectroscopy as it applies to measuring the makeup of non-incandescent objects? If the approach is feasible, it should be easy enough to design a series of tests of various contrails to find out whether there actually is barium, blood cells, or any other bad juju contained therein.

posted 08-13-2001 11:08 PM
Is there anyone around with actual hands-on knowledge of spectroscopy as it applies to measuring the makeup of non-incandescent objects?

That would not describe me. However, armed with some references from toxdoc and Google, I've been doing a bit of reading. According to the University of Washington Department of Environmental Health, there are several ways of performing optical remote sensing of environmental contaminants. http://depts.washington.edu/orslab/main.htm

quote:Lidar can be applied to measure a variety of things in the atmosphere, including temperature profiles, clouds, and atmospheric aerosols. If two laser pulses at appropriate wavelengths are employed, gaseous contaminants such as ozone or NOx can be observed with a technique know[n] as DIAL, which stands for Differential Absorption Lidar.

Lidar has several advantages over traditional methods, but the main advantage is that it can map the location if contamintants over a wide region. Lidars can perform measurements up to 80 km, which is a verly large scale.

quote:Essentially, the instrument measures chemicals by shining an invisible light beam over a distance up to 1000 meters through the air and detecting changes in the intensity and color of the light. Just as visible light can be sorted into a spectrum of different wavelengths corresponding to various colors of light, infrared light can be sorted into a spectrum corresponding to different temperatures or energy levels. The OP-FTIR uses a device called an interferometer that allows us to isolate the wavelengths of light, analogous to a prism that separates white light into colors. The infrared light is gathered by a telescope fitted with a special detector that is cooled by liquid nitrogen to more than 150 degrees below zero. Because infrared light is thermal energy, this type of detector provides extraordinary sensitivity.

A particular chemical will absorb energy only at particular wavelengths in the infrared spectrum, producing a unique pattern or "fingerprint" in the infrared absorbence spectrum for each compound. This absorbence pattern is so unique that it can be used to identify most unknown compounds. We have infrared spectral libraries containing data on more than 6000 compounds and soon plan make a subset of our data avaliable on the web. The amount of energy absorbed (light intensity) tells how many molecules of the compound are in the beam path, a measure of gas concentration. Thus the instrument can qualitatively identify contaminants in the air and quantitatively measure the concentration.

The remote sensing FTIR has many advantages over more conventional sampling technology. First, it is a direct reading instrument that provides rapid on-site information. In a matter of minutes one can identify and quantify contaminants in an area or worksite, and monitor changes in contaminant levels on a continuous basis. In contrast, conventional methods usually require an air sample to be transported back to a laboratory and may require days or weeks of analysis to produce the same information. Second, the instrument can identify complex mixtures of many chemicals, and quantify them at low concentrations. It is possible to identify mixtures containing more than 20 compounds with detection limits down to a few parts per billion (ppb).

Granted, 1000 meters is not 30,000 feet, but maybe there is some way around that limitation.

quote:An important tool we use is a unique analytical instrument called an Open Path Fourier Transform Infrared spectrometer, or OP-FTIR. There are perhaps 100 such instruments available in the USA today. Previous instruments of this type were often large (housed in a small van or truck) and difficult to operate requiring many skilled support staff. We have developed a small, transportable OP-FTIR (sometimes known around the lab as the"baby FTIR"), a small (trunk size), portable instrument based on a unistatic design. We also have a larger commercial instrument that we use for studying trace pollutants in the atmosphere.

However, we have several board participants from Washington State. Those with excellent interpersonal skills... (Chem11, are you listening? Or is enegenma lurking, perhaps?)...might be able to contact this lab and see if they have tried analyzing contrails for, say barium, and if they did, what did they see? Or would they be willing to give it a try on a slow day when there happened to be lots of contrailing in the sky? The laboratory is directed by Professor Michael Yost and is located at 668 Northlake Way NE, a few blocks from the UW main campus.

posted 04-19-2002 01:53 AM
The only way to collect a valid sample is to do as Duncan says ,break faa regs concerning proximity to other aircraft and go directly in the plume with your own aircraft.This would call for going directly in the wake of the offending plane with a collector fashioned from a common hepa filter collecting whatever it is selectively. you could only expose the filter to the atomosphere while directly behind the offending aircraft aircraft.If this were to be video ducumented, showing the chain of possesion of the materials going, upon landing, to a respected and trusted chemist with other trustworthy witnesses present during analysis and collection, I believe we could conclusively prove that chemtrails are not only real, but a human health hazzard, to put it mildly

I can assure you that more than a single gram of material is being released by the fleet of planes criss-crossing our skies with CHEMTRAILS. And there is no doubt that this material is reaching ground level where the American population has no choice about the air that it is forced to breathe.

I will dig up the old photos and put it on a page so everyone can see how *collect* some samples...

quote:According to the University of Washington Department of Environmental Health, there are several ways of performing optical remote sensing of environmental contaminants.

Regarding the above quote, I would like to introduce the ISND. It is an 'incidence sounder'. The one pictured is at the HAARP facility. I have gotten reports that these same arrays can be found all along the pacific coastline. They are arrays equipped with non-differential (ND) GPS comm links. These arrays collect data on radioactivity and resonance in the upper layers of our atmosphere. They are also able to instantly relay this data to operational craft (hint hint).

To all of you that live in Oregon, Washington State, California or even any near vancouver or coastal BC: Do you recognize this display and/or have you seen anything like it anywhere around you?

posted 07-25-2002 03:35 PM
Thanks for resurrecting these posts from the past Alpha. The information that 323L1 provided is exactly what I'm lookin' for ..so thankyooou 323L1. Northlake Way you say??? Yippeee, that's my neck of the woods!!

I vaguely remember seeing an array that looked like that a long time ago. Somewhere over on the coast I think. Well, thanks again Alpha, I'm off to do some serious walkin' through the phone book! Hee hee hee, the good Ol' University of WaShingTon. Yahoo, I'm excited now!

posted 07-25-2002 05:14 PM
Hello Duncan;(((Sure wish I could comply with your request for "hard data"))) If I could arrange it, I'd have you seated just behind the exhaust outlet of a tanker plane. You should have been around my town for the last few days to see the disgusting assault on our skies, but then you've seen it time and again. If you think you are putting doubts about CT's in the minds of the unsuspecting, think again.